Aditya Bagrodia

practical implementation strategies to study new ideas in a way that's safe effective and perhaps not overly onerous as well so before maybe if you don't mind share a little bit about you know how your interest in clinical trials and moving the needle kind of began

practical implementation strategies to study new ideas in a way that's safe effective and perhaps not overly onerous as well so before maybe if you don't mind share a little bit about you know how your interest in clinical trials and moving the needle kind of began

practical implementation strategies to study new ideas in a way that's safe effective and perhaps not overly onerous as well so before maybe if you don't mind share a little bit about you know how your interest in clinical trials and moving the needle kind of began

It is a process and it's laborious. And I guess it's intimidating enough that many people don't ever give it a shot on the one hand. Then a lot of people try and they fail, on the other hand. I mean, I guess they learn something along the process. It's not a total failure. But it could be helpful to take a case example, perhaps one of your early clinical trials.

It is a process and it's laborious. And I guess it's intimidating enough that many people don't ever give it a shot on the one hand. Then a lot of people try and they fail, on the other hand. I mean, I guess they learn something along the process. It's not a total failure. But it could be helpful to take a case example, perhaps one of your early clinical trials.

It is a process and it's laborious. And I guess it's intimidating enough that many people don't ever give it a shot on the one hand. Then a lot of people try and they fail, on the other hand. I mean, I guess they learn something along the process. It's not a total failure. But it could be helpful to take a case example, perhaps one of your early clinical trials.

And let's just literally walk through it from, you know, you're familiar with the disease. prostate cancer, biopsies, surveillance, focal therapy, and you've come up with a question that you think is worth answering. Let's walk through the nuts and bolts of taking that question to a trial.

And let's just literally walk through it from, you know, you're familiar with the disease. prostate cancer, biopsies, surveillance, focal therapy, and you've come up with a question that you think is worth answering. Let's walk through the nuts and bolts of taking that question to a trial.

And let's just literally walk through it from, you know, you're familiar with the disease. prostate cancer, biopsies, surveillance, focal therapy, and you've come up with a question that you think is worth answering. Let's walk through the nuts and bolts of taking that question to a trial.

Yeah, I mean, it's easy enough now to say that's a no-brainer. And a focal therapy trial conceived today on September 26, 2024, including grade group one patients would probably get a lot more pushback in terms of, you know, you're exposing folks that should do extremely well to some harm is generally, I think, accepted. So...

Yeah, I mean, it's easy enough now to say that's a no-brainer. And a focal therapy trial conceived today on September 26, 2024, including grade group one patients would probably get a lot more pushback in terms of, you know, you're exposing folks that should do extremely well to some harm is generally, I think, accepted. So...

Yeah, I mean, it's easy enough now to say that's a no-brainer. And a focal therapy trial conceived today on September 26, 2024, including grade group one patients would probably get a lot more pushback in terms of, you know, you're exposing folks that should do extremely well to some harm is generally, I think, accepted. So...

I mean, to me, it highlights an important point that, you know, getting it kind of right-ish off the gates, maybe even taking a bit of a gamble in terms of what's this going to look like. You know, it's so easy to look at a trial that was conceived 10, 15 years ago and slice and dice it to bits because of the methodology involved. back then, but it sounds like you made the right call.

I mean, to me, it highlights an important point that, you know, getting it kind of right-ish off the gates, maybe even taking a bit of a gamble in terms of what's this going to look like. You know, it's so easy to look at a trial that was conceived 10, 15 years ago and slice and dice it to bits because of the methodology involved. back then, but it sounds like you made the right call.

I mean, to me, it highlights an important point that, you know, getting it kind of right-ish off the gates, maybe even taking a bit of a gamble in terms of what's this going to look like. You know, it's so easy to look at a trial that was conceived 10, 15 years ago and slice and dice it to bits because of the methodology involved. back then, but it sounds like you made the right call.

And I'm sure that was a big call. And if I may, I think these days, appropriately, the key stakeholders absolutely involve patients as well. It's really been nice to see over the course of our careers that having the advocates at the table, the stakeholders is key. All right.

And I'm sure that was a big call. And if I may, I think these days, appropriately, the key stakeholders absolutely involve patients as well. It's really been nice to see over the course of our careers that having the advocates at the table, the stakeholders is key. All right.

And I'm sure that was a big call. And if I may, I think these days, appropriately, the key stakeholders absolutely involve patients as well. It's really been nice to see over the course of our careers that having the advocates at the table, the stakeholders is key. All right.

So you decided looking at essentially oncologic outcomes, quality of life outcomes in patients considering focal therapy was going to be the way that you go. Fair. And maybe one other question before, you know, this is something I kind of struggle with. It's like, do you provide a skeleton to keep the conversation moving? Or do you kind of leave it open ended with all the opinions?

So you decided looking at essentially oncologic outcomes, quality of life outcomes in patients considering focal therapy was going to be the way that you go. Fair. And maybe one other question before, you know, this is something I kind of struggle with. It's like, do you provide a skeleton to keep the conversation moving? Or do you kind of leave it open ended with all the opinions?